Did ancient Hebrews reach the shores of the North and South American continents thousands of years before Christopher Columbus?

What evidence is there for Hebrew and Israelite occupation of the Western Hemisphere even a thousand years before Christ?

Was trans-Atlantic commerce and travel fairly routine in the days of king Solomon of Israel? Read here the intriguing, fascinating saga of the TRUE DISCOVERERS OF AMERICA!

A stone in a dry creek bed in New Mexico, discovered by early settlers in the region, is one of the most amazing archaeological discoveries in the Western Hemisphere. It contains engraved on its flank the entire Ten Commandments written in ancient Hebrew script! Hebrew scholars, such as Cyrus Gordon of Brandeis University near Boston, have vouched for its authenticity.

I visited the site of the huge boulder, near Las Lunas, New Mexico, in 1973 and photographed the Hebrew inscriptions. A local newspaper reporter guided me to the mysterious site, located out in the middle of the New Mexico desert. We watched for rattlesnakes, as we hiked in to the spot where the boulder lies, unmoved and in situ for who knows how many mysterious centuries. Who put it there? Who wrote the incredible inscription of the TEN COMMANDMENTS in an ancient Hebrew dialect?

In his new book The Origins and Empire of Ancient Israel, author-historian Steven M. Collins points out that the “Las Lunas Stone” inscription in archaic Hebrew was written in the Hebrew letters of the style of the Moabite Stone, dated to about 1,000 B.C. This would place the writing on the stone to the time of the kingdom of ancient Israel under its most affluent and powerful king, Solomon, who reigned from 1014 B.C. to 974 B.C.

Exactly how old the writing is, however, is not known. George Morehouse, a geologist, studied it and concluded it is between 500 and 2000 years old, based on the weathered patina on the rock. However, the inscriptions have received periodic scrubbings, says Collins, and therefore some of the ancient evidence of weatherization could have been removed in the process. Collins points out that the punctuation in the inscription matches that found in ancient Greek manuscripts of the fourth century.

Dr. Barry Fell states that separation points found in the artifact date to as early as 1200 B.C.

Evidence of Ancient Egyptians:

Literally hundreds of inscribed Phoenician, Celtic and Basque stone grave markers have been found in Susquehanna Valley of Pennsylvania, dated to 800-600 B.C., over 2,000 years before the fateful voyage of Columbus! It must be said, therefore, that Christopher Columbus did not really “discover” America. Rather, he and his intrepid sailors rediscovered the “New World”!

Incredible as it may seem, the presence of ancient Egyptians has been found in the writing system of the Wabanaki/Micmac Indians in Maine, a sub-tribe of the Algonquins. It has even been documented, says Collins, that the ancient Egyptians sailed the Pacific Ocean as far as Polynesia and Hawaii, searching for gold, about 1,000 B.C. – during the very time of Solomon’s Empire in Israel.

One proof of this fact is an inscription in ancient Ogam and Libyan – the language of Egyptian merchantmen – found near the Rio Grande River of Texas. The inscription states than an Egyptian-Libyan king by the name of Shishonq visited North America a number of times. It is translated as, “A crew of Shishonq the king took shelter in this place of concealment.” Says Dr. Barry Fell, several kings of this name ruled Egypt and Libya between 1000 and 800 B.C.

Interestingly, the Bible itself mentions a king of Egypt by the name of “Shishak” (“Shishonq”) who invaded the Kingdom of Judah during the time of Rehoboam, son of Solomon, after the kingdom of Israel separated from allegiance to the throne of David. Shishak was no doubt an ally of Jeroboam, the king of Israel, at that time. He was a mighty king and plundered the Temple and riches of the kingdom of Judah (see I Kings 14:25-26).

Steve Collins declares:

“It is significant that Dr. Fell noted the time period of ‘1000-800 B.C.’ as marking a period of significant Old World exploration of the New World. This time frame exactly parallels Bible records showing international travel and commerce flourished with fleets undetaking multi-year voyages and visiting other continents.

This time frame begins with the reigns of Kings David and Solomon, but continues through much of the history of the northern kingdom of Israel, the dominant partner in the Phoenician alliance until Israel fell circa 721 B.C. The conclusion is inescapable that the record of ancient history verifies the biblical accounts.

The Bible is not a detailed history of all that happened in the ancient world, but it confirms what archaeology and epigraphy have shown about the real state of commerce and travel in the ancient world”

(Collins, page 227, emphasis mine except boldface).

“A date of 800-700 B.C. for this stele confirms that the triple alliance of Israel, Egypt and Phoenicia lasted long after the lifetime of King Solomon. The Bible records that the ten tribes of Israel forsook worshiping the Creator God after Solomon’s death, and adopted the religious customs of Egypt, Tyre and Sidon. Biblical accounts show that Israel and Phoenicia were still very closely allied during the reign of King Ahab of Israel (circa 850 B.C.), and there is no evidence that their alliance suffered a breach until approximately 721 B.C., when Israel ceased to be a nation in the Mideast. . . .

Therefore the Iowa stele showing that these ancient nations were still working together around 800 B.C. in the New World is consistent with biblical accounts” (ibid., p.212).

In addition to these discoveries, another stele exhibiting the ancient Egyptian-Libyan script was unearthed on Long Island, New York. Dr. Barry Fell states that it also probably dates to around the ninth century B.C.

Still another amazing discovery was made in Oklahoma, where another stele was found which contained references to the gods Baal and Ra, with an inscription which was “an extract from the Hymn to the Aton by Pharaoh Akhnaton.” Although the dating of Akhnation is purported to be in the 13th century B.C., new Egyptian dynastic dating methods indicate he was much closer to 800 B.C.

Immanuel Velikovsky points out that Akhnaton was a member of the 18th dynasty in Egypt, which co-existed with the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah during the 800s B.C. He was a contemporary of king Jehoshaphat in Jerusalem, and reigned from 870-840 B.C. (see Ages in Chaos, p.229). This Oklahoma stele is written in Iberian-Punic, a language descended from Phoenician-Hebrew, and Barry Fell declares that it is “scarcely older than 800 B.C.”

Arabs loved to hate. Even out of office, he ranked as the most disliked foreign leader in a survey of public opinion in six Middle East countries completed last month. The contrast couldn’t be sharper with President Barack Obama at the outset of his trip to the Mideast in which he will address the Muslim world in Cairo, and as his popularity is surging toward rock-star proportions. Obama’s problem, however, may be that the good vibes he’s eliciting in Arab countries are accompanied by expectations he may struggle to meet.

Thesame poll that found a 61% dislike for Bush saw nearly half of respondents – 45% – take a positive view of the new President.

While Obama’s conciliatory tone is welcome, some are giving him the benefit of the doubt simply because of his Muslim family roots and Muslim middle name, Hussein.

There have been positive reviews in the region for some of Obama’s initial steps in office, such as ordering the closure of the prison at GuantÁnamo, moving to withdraw troops from Iraq and calling for resumption of Arab-Israeli peace negotiations.

Obama is certainly different from Bush,” Egyptian PresidentHosni Mubarakraved recently.

“Obama is a man who conducts business with a great deal of accuracy, realism and rationality.”

The prospect of a warm Obama-Arab embrace is already worrying some in Israel, where a recent poll showed merely 31% believed that Obama was pro-Israel. After Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s recent talks with Obama in Washington, the leading Israeli daily Ma’ariv quoted a senior Israeli political source saying, “Israel is no longer America’s favorite son.”(See pictures of Islam’s soft revolution.)

Obama’s positive reception in the Arab world could certainly assist him, at least in the short term, with his various initiatives aimed at repairing American interests in the region.

“There is a tremendous rift between America and the Middle East because of the last eight years,” says Nabil Fahmy,

former Egyptian ambassador to the U.S. “There are three major crises: Afghanistan, Iraq and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

To achieve progress, you have to have regional players help you with these things.”

But Obama could be sowing the seeds for greater disillusionment, given the difficulty he will encounter in fulfilling the expectations he has raised. Obama will be even more popular among Arabs if he pressures Israel, but if Netanyahu’s new right-wing government fails to budge, or if Palestinian attacks on Israel continue, the President risks a backlash from Israel’s many supporters on Capitol Hill.

A second tricky issue is democracy. If Obama doesn’t push for greaterfreedom in the Middle East, he’ll upset the region’s embattled democracy activists.

If he pushes for political change, he’ll undermine the Arab autocrats on whose support his hopes for a comprehensive peace with Israel rest.

Iran may be another issue that damns Obama either way. If he’s too aggressive on the issue of the Islamic Republic‘s nuclear program, the Muslim street will view him as doing Israel’s bidding and upholding double standards by declining to criticize Israel’s suspected nuclear arsenal. If he’s too conciliatory toward Tehran, Arab autocrats and Israel will sound the alarm about a Persian menace. “Obama is plainly trying to alter the course of the ship of state,” saysDavid Welch, a former U.S. ambassador to Egypt. “But the degree of policy difference from one Administration to another is not that considerable. You can have repackaging or readjustments, but under Republicans or Democrats, there has been a fairly consistent focus on certain fundamentals.”